Prefetch and SSDs

I'm with WHS. SSD - Install and Transfer the Operating System

Leave it on if it works better for you.
That is what I'm doing.

I tried it both ways and it works better with Superfetch on.

Neither way is wrong. What works best for you is the way to have it.

Mike

Hopalong X said:

I'm with WHS. SSD - Install and Transfer the Operating System

Leave it on if it works better for you.
That is what I'm doing.

I tried it both ways and it works better with Superfetch on.

Neither way is wrong. What works best for you is the way to have it.

Mike

That's what I think. But the Intel toolbox disagrees.

essenbe said:

That's what I think. But the Intel toolbox disagrees.

Exactly, and they seem pretty convinced that it should be turned off...I just don't understand why.

pparks1 said:

essenbe said:

That's what I think. But the Intel toolbox disagrees.

Exactly, and they seem pretty convinced that it should be turned off...I just don't understand why.

I don't either. I've been to their forums and searched, they say turn it off but no explanation of why. I've turned mine back on for now. I want to see how it works out. OCZ forum says the same with no explanation. I've tried it both ways with the vertex2 and saw no difference, but it seems to make a difference with Intel.

According to Overclockers net, an SSD writes in blocks, superfetch loads the memory to ram but writes its logs to the SSD thus writing a whole block. Everytime it detects a change in your patterns, it writes a new log to the same block. The concern seems to be that it is not the size of the writes that will hurt the SSD, because the logs are verry small, but it is the constant writes to the same block. They also say that ram does not write in properly aligned sectors. How much truth is there, I don't know. But I have read on the Intel forums that SSDs write in blocks. If the SSD is set up in 512kb blocks and you write 4kb to it, the SSD will write 0 or 1's to the rest of the block.

essenbe said:

According to Overclockers net, an SSD writes in blocks, superfetch loads the memory to ram but writes its logs to the SSD thus writing a whole block. Everytime it detects a change in your patterns, it writes a new log to the same block. The concern seems to be that it is not the size of the writes that will hurt the SSD, because the logs are verry small, but it is the constant writes to the same block. They also say that ram does not write in properly aligned sectors. How much truth is there, I don't know. But I have read on the Intel forums that SSDs write in blocks. If the SSD is set up in 512kb blocks and you write 4kb to it, the SSD will write 0 or 1's to the rest of the block.

An SSD won't let you write to the same physical block over and over. Wear leveling will prevent that. Windows writes small amounts of data to lots of logs and databases (like the registry for instance). This is no different I think.

I have had my OS on an SSD for 1 month now with 176 power-on hours and with Superfetch/prefetch on. I also have my browser and photoshop caches on the drive. According to the SMART wear indicator from the drive, I have used .16% of the SSD lifetime. That means I have 50 years left on the SSD! (12 power on years).

+1 GeneO

Spent the last hour plus on the Intel web site.
From everything I could find on the Intel site including the forum the controller by wear leveling rotates the write blocks.
Not a worry to me.
They could be a little more up front with explanations.
Unfortunately all the SSD makers think everything is top secret.